PY Online Forums - Bringing the Pontiac Hobby Together

PY Online Forums - Bringing the Pontiac Hobby Together (https://forums.maxperformanceinc.com/forums/index.php)
-   Pontiac - Street (https://forums.maxperformanceinc.com/forums/forumdisplay.php?f=418)
-   -   RAM AIR 3 CAMS (https://forums.maxperformanceinc.com/forums/showthread.php?t=623834)

KEN CROCIE 02-03-2010 02:58 PM

RAM AIR 3 CAMS
 
I just recieved an Elgin 909 RA3 duplicate and although the .050"dur. and .271" lift checked out, it didn't have the 30 deg constant dwell over the nose. I ordered up a Melling SPC3 and it had the same deficientcy.Any one out there have a good RA3 cam they can sell me ?

Formulas 02-03-2010 07:48 PM

A 744 factory copy Ken ? If so i have a new one, ordered it from Warrior Racing in a engine rebuild kit, never used the cam..
Its a fat lobe cam too, which cant hurt :)

The exhaust lobes look right and are flat nosed. the intake lobes are flat nosed but not as much as exhaust which appears to be all correct for a 744 lobe profile.

KEN CROCIE 02-04-2010 08:41 PM

I'll take it. 909-980-1451

lust4speed 02-04-2010 10:02 PM

Ken, would you explain "30 degree constant dwell over the nose". I'm lost.

Formulas 02-04-2010 10:44 PM

Basically the valve is open at max lift the 30 degrees.. thats why the lobes look so different from other cams, the top of the lobe appears flat cuz Pontiac keept increasing duration while keeping the .400 - .410 ish lifts

Kenth 02-05-2010 01:11 PM

The #744 needs at least 125lbs valve springs closed or valve float WILL occur.
Using STD 90-100lbs valvesprings with this cam and the engine stops pulling at or just over 4000rpmīs.

KEN CROCIE 02-05-2010 06:44 PM

Just heard from the Co. that makes Melling's cams-EPC-and they said they don't claim to make fact. dupe cams. But, I said, The Melling cat. sez it's a dupe for the RA3. EPC sez " there's the problem". I think Melling thinks they are getting a 744 but nobody is checking.

73T/A 02-05-2010 08:12 PM

Ken,I recently had a similar issue with a Melling SPC-8(041) cam.We were degreeing the cam with Cam Logic equipment and also checking the cam specs.The lobe lift was just as advertised .313 but the intake and exhaust durations were not as advertised.We then picked up a second new Melling SPC-8 and the readings were the same as the first one.I then called Melling tech and told them about the issue.They stated that I could mail them the cam and they would check it.I never did send it though.It was my understanding that CMC(Camshaft Machine Company) in Jackson,Michigan ground most if not all of the flat tappet cams be it Melling,Comp,Edelbrock etc.Both of the Mellings had CWC(CMC upside down on them) stamped on them.

straycat 02-05-2010 08:35 PM

So how long ago did Melling cease manufacturing cams?

Tom Vaught 02-05-2010 11:09 PM

Camshaft Machine Company used to make most of the factory "Low Volume" camshafts.
W-30 & W-31 camshafts, RA III, and RA IV cams, Z-28 camshafts, LS-6 and LS-7 (054)
cams, Ford camshafts, etc.

CMC was bought by Crane Cams years ago. After Crane got into trouble CMC was sold as well as the Wolverine Blue Racer cam retail business was dropped.

At one time CMC sold millions of camshafts to most of the other vendors and the cams were reboxed: Isky used to have a cartoon about cams coming into the back of a camshaft business and being reboxed as the performance cam companies "unique" camshafts. He would send you a list of all of the reboxed cams and their sellers.

Tom Vaught

I can find out what the CMC people are doing today with Pontiac cams.

Kenth 02-06-2010 06:31 AM

CWC is the foundry, CMC is one a grinder of many.

http://www.industrynet.com/results.asp?headers=CA0705

The CWC foundry in Roosevelt Park once was part of the Campbell, Wyant & Cannon Foundry Co., founded in 1908, that employed thousands at various plants in the area during the middle of the 20th Century.

The present CWC Textron camshaft-making operation is housed in what once was known as "Plant No. 5," built in 1945. Camshafts began to be made at CWC's Plant No. 3 on Henry Street in 1936, but the camshaft work was based in Plant No. 5 in 1955. CWC was bought by Textron Inc. in 1956.

CWC Textron is a leading supplier of camshafts and camshaft technology to the global motor vehicle engine market.


Alloyed gray iron and ductile iron camshafts made at CWC Textron are running in tens of millions of cars and light trucks around the world. The camshafts are in cars made by General Motors, DaimlerChrysler, Ford, Honda, Toyota and other auto companies.


The workers at CWC-Textron annually produce millions of camshafts.

F.e. #540233 is the, 1961 and on, cast cam core used by many "manufacturers" for "their own" finished product, incl. Pontiac.

ID-#īs is stamped in front. 1 letter or 1 digit or at the back usually a lot of letters and digits. There is also colour codes on the camshaft in front and rear.

Me Notyou 02-06-2010 07:32 AM

So who makes the right stuff now?

Evil Stu 02-06-2010 08:05 AM

Ken,

Seen this?

http://cgi.ebay.com/ebaymotors/GTO-p...Q5fAccessories

Stu

73T/A 02-06-2010 11:11 AM

FWIW,the Melling SPC-8 cam's that we checked had a Melling SPC-8 label along with a WG1014 number on the box.The WG1014 is the Wolverine/Blue Racer part number for the 041 cam.

Tom Vaught 02-06-2010 11:46 AM

The two businesses Melling and CMC are with-in 1/4 mile of each other and the families have worked together for years and years.

Great Info on the CWC company. I wonder if CWC casts up the oil pump bodies for the Melling oil pumps?

More Camshaft History: http://www.engineproparts.com/Crane_Detail.htm

Tom Vaught

ps The problem is that most of these companies have been supplying each other for years and years and you don't really know who is actually making the whole deal themselves. Most likely it is a group of companies putting together a final product like an oil pump. Cover from one company, body from the same or different company, gears from a different company, spring from peterson spring, shaft from a shaft company, etc.

Cliff R 02-06-2010 02:21 PM

A little over a year ago, we attempted to get CMC to reproduce the WG-5059 camshafts for Pontiac engines. I was given a direct contact number to a representative from that company. After many left calls and attempts to get a live person on the phone, I gave up on the idea. They must be "fat, dumb and happy" at CMC, because they don't even have the intiative to try to drum up any new business. They had no idea if I wanted 10, or 10,000 of those cams produced? Not a single phone call was ever returned to us. That sort of attitude by an American Company doesn't surprise me at all. I run into it ALL THE TIME trying to get parts made. Some woln't even talk to you at all, and hang up on you unless you want at least 10,000 pieces a month.

Cripe, I can go offshore, the Chinese will make 100 of anything I want, at a tenth the price of any American Company!....FWIW......Cliff

Curly Joe 02-06-2010 03:45 PM

another e bay
 
http://cgi.ebay.com/ebaymotors/Ponti...Q5fAccessories

Formulas 02-06-2010 05:34 PM

Curly that one looks incorrect. the lobes have to much peak to them.
At least from what i can tell from a pic. i did save it to desktop and then made it bigger to look at..

Its not the hot ticket of a cam anyways unless your going correct resto.

I should of taken a pic of mine..didnt think of it..

Tom Vaught 02-06-2010 09:56 PM

I agree!

The "flat nose" on a true RA-744 cam is obvious with the naked eye.


Tom Vaught

Johnny406 02-06-2010 10:04 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Cliff R (Post 3901133)
A little over a year ago, we attempted to get CMC to reproduce the WG-5059 camshafts for Pontiac engines. I was given a direct contact number to a representative from that company. After many left calls and attempts to get a live person on the phone, I gave up on the idea. They must be "fat, dumb and happy" at CMC, because they don't even have the intiative to try to drum up any new business. They had no idea if I wanted 10, or 10,000 of those cams produced? Not a single phone call was ever returned to us. That sort of attitude by an American Company doesn't surprise me at all. I run into it ALL THE TIME trying to get parts made. Some woln't even talk to you at all, and hang up on you unless you want at least 10,000 pieces a month.

Cripe, I can go offshore, the Chinese will make 100 of anything I want, at a tenth the price of any American Company!....FWIW......Cliff

I was thinking about asking Lanier Henry who is a part owner/partner (or damn good friends etc) with Schneider Racing Cams. They are grinding me a cam now FWIW...

screamingchief 02-06-2010 11:05 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by 73T/A
Ken,I recently had a similar issue with a Melling SPC-8(041) cam.We were degreeing the cam with Cam Logic equipment and also checking the cam specs.The lobe lift was just as advertised .313 but the intake and exhaust durations were not as advertised.We then picked up a second new Melling SPC-8 and the readings were the same as the first one.I then called Melling tech and told them about the issue.They stated that I could mail them the cam and they would check it.I never did send it though.It was my understanding that CMC(Camshaft Machine Company) in Jackson,Michigan ground most if not all of the flat tappet cams be it Melling,Comp,Edelbrock etc.Both of the Mellings had CWC(CMC upside down on them) stamped on them.

Just a note on this deal,understand that the factory cams were not rated at the same lifts as many "modern" cams are rated at.

Most modern cams are rated per current SAE guidelines,typically giving us the duration numbers @ .006" lift at the valve (which is usually around .004" at the cam,then multiply by the OE rocker ratio).

So .004 x 1.5 = .006

Now the '65 to '76 OE cams were typically rated @ .002" on the opening side,and .008" to .009" on the closing side,at least that's what was stated in the HO racing HPED&BPA book (page 78 first paragraph).

Which might explain some of these discrepancies.

So understand that how and where one is measuring the cam can make the duration numbers come out ever so slightly different than those OE cam numbers were.

Just where the cams duration is being rated needs to be known to accurately compare the numbers from one cam to another cam.

Crane had a bulletin about that a while back,I'll include the text here:
Quote:

Originally Posted by Crane Cams
Why Crane Cams Measures Advertised Duration at .004 Lifter Rise

We are frequently asked why Crane Cams measures the Advertised Duration of hydraulic lifter camshafts at .004 lifter rise on the cam lobe (this applies to both flat-faced and roller hydraulic grinds) when several competitors measure their advertised duration at .006 lifter rise. The answer is that we attempt to comply with the SAE (Society of Automotive Engineers) J604 standard.This standard states that hydraulic automotive camshafts should have their duration measured at .006 lift at the valve.On pushrod engines, lift at the valve is the product of (cam lobe lift x rocker arm ratio). Most popular pushrod engines use rocker ratios of 1.5, 1.6, or 1.7.When you divide .006 lift at the valve by any of the popular ratios, you come up with .004 when the answer is rounded to three decimal places. Using .006 lift at the lobe results in at least .009 lift at the valve.That is quite a difference from the SAE standard of .006 lift at the valve.

This difference in measurement of advertised duration does make the intensity of Crane Cams lobes appear to be less aggressive when compared to the competition.Camshaft Lobe Intensity is frequently defined as the difference between the advertised duration and the duration @ .050 lifter rise.It is generally accepted that the lower the number of degrees of difference between these two figures relates to the greater the amount of Camshaft Lobe Intensity (or aggressiveness in the lobe design).Camshaft Lobe Intensity is only valid, however, when the advertised duration of two camshafts is measured at the same point.At first glance, it would not appear the .002 of lifter rise measurement would make much difference in the perceived Lobe Intensity.The fact, however, is this is the first part of the lift curve where any clearance in the valve train is taken up,and the lift rate at this initial point is at its slowest point.

Consequently, .002 lifter rise difference can create a significant misrepresentation of actual Camshaft Intensity. When comparing lobe profiles, it is best to compare cam lobes at exactly the same points.

Keep in mind that the discussion above is about hydraulic lifter camshafts in pushrod engines.For overhead cam engines (OHC) where there is no rocker ratio, Crane Cams measures duration at .006 valve lift.That creates different issues when comparing duration (and related power ranges) of camshafts used in pushrod engines as compared with OHC engines. See Crane's Engine Builder Newsletter #31 dated February 22, 2007 @ www.cranecams.com.

So who is right and who is wrong here?At Crane Cams, we are only claiming to comply with the SAE J604 standard.That way, Crane Cams can be evaluated with other cams that comply with the accepted world standard.

Hope that helps.

Bret P.

73T/A 02-07-2010 02:18 AM

Bret,
Thanks for the info.That may have been the issue.

Cliff R 02-07-2010 07:38 AM

"I was thinking about asking Lanier Henry who is a part owner/partner (or damn good friends etc) with Schneider Racing Cams. They are grinding me a cam now FWIW..."

It's my understanding that CMC ground the original WG-5059 cams. They also have the original prints. In order to have a run made, a few samples would need to be obtained, and measured, then put in an engine and ran on the dyno, etc.

Once satisfied with the product, an order would be placed for a minimum run or price per camshaft based on the amount they designate per order. I have no idea what their minimum order would be, as I never got a return phone call from anyone at that company, and I left numerous messages at several folks desks? Typically, the more you purchase, the less they cost per camshaft.

I also gave up on the idea due to the high lobe failure rates we are seeing with flat camshafts these days. It was probably a good thing that CMC didn't make it easy for us, because no doubt 20-30 percent of the cams we would have sold would have had a lobe or two knocked off of them (for various reasons beyond our control). This gets us in to having to warranty them, etc.

We went to roller cams here for all engines built here (when we choose the parts). We also went to forged cranks and forged 4340 connecting rods as well. End result, Cliff sleeps better at night!......Cliff

Rocky Rotella 02-07-2010 09:54 AM

2 Attachment(s)
A couple of pictures of an original 744-profile camshaft. You can clearly see the "constant dwell" at peak lobe lift that's often referred to.

tom s 02-07-2010 09:59 AM

I have your dist gear sitting on my desk for a couple weeks now!Do you need to own it or use it.$100 if you want to own it.Tom

tom s 02-07-2010 10:00 AM

sorry yt hi jack!meant to PM.Tom

Tom Vaught 02-07-2010 11:07 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Cliff R (Post 3901679)
" It's my understanding that CMC ground the original WG-5059 cams. They also have the original prints. In order to have a run made, a few samples would need to be obtained, and measured, then put in an engine and ran on the dyno, etc.

Once satisfied with the product, an order would be placed for a minimum run or price per camshaft based on the amount they designate per order. I have no idea what their minimum order would be, as I never got a return phone call from anyone at that company, and I left numerous messages at several folks desks? Typically, the more you purchase, the less they cost per camshaft. Cliff

A bit more history:

The guy who "Wrote the Book" on Camshaft design, Don Hubbard, was a "Boost Guy" and very good friend of mine during my early years at Ford. His book is here: http://cambook.net/

Don had a turbocharged Jaguar 6 cylinder. He worked on the Chevrolet Can Am Turbo
cars during that race series.

Don had worked for Harvey Crane and later was the Vice President for Camshaft Machine Company (OEM Cams) and Wolverine Blue Racer Cams (Aftermarket). I was a dealer for the Wolverine Blue Racer camshafts and still have some of the camshafts on the shelves.

I would typically buy the camshafts 10 at a time and the camshaft kits (w lifters and lube) 5 at a time. I was not required to buy 50 cams at a time. I would order about 6 times a year. Unfortunately Wolverine Blue Racer went out of business. They (CMC/ WBR) made great camshafts.

The Chief Engineer of the CMC / Wolverine company was a "Pontiac Guy" named Glenn Corwin.

I watched a Pontiac hydraulic camshafts being ground on one of their high speed grinders in less than a minute. They also ground all of the early Roller camshafts for the Ford Motor Company.

Yep, CMC ground the WG-5059 camshafts. They also had an extensive cam profile collection (using their measurement equipment). I had a couple of new camshafts from "the other guys" that CMC read for me. One of these camshafts was the famous Milt Schornack "744" cheater camshaft, that in no way, resembled a factory 744 camshaft, lol!
It was a true CHEATER camshaft.

Tom Vaught

A.W.Dille 02-07-2010 09:42 PM

After reading these posts it makes me wonder what would be closest to correct if a person wanted a 744 cam. Or one that would be the closest to the power that the original produced.

Tom Vaught 02-07-2010 10:05 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by A.W.Dille (Post 3902445)
After reading these posts it makes me wonder what would be closest to correct if a person wanted a 744 cam. Or one that would be the closest to the power that the original produced.

A true Wolverine Blue Racer Boxed 744 camshaft.

I have several of the High Lift 744 Boxed Wolverine cams but none of the stocker cams.

Tom Vaught

KEN CROCIE 02-09-2010 09:45 PM

I'll post tomorrow a side by side of a 744 and SPC-3/E-909-P lobe. Quite a difference considering the specs are the same.

Formulas 02-09-2010 10:17 PM

Rocky.. Your busted. Thats a SD. cam look at the dist gear teeth (smaller Dia.) regular cam the teeth are almost as big as the bearing journal..
Same lobes tho... just bustin your chops a bit :) Thanks for the pic.

Rocky Rotella 02-10-2010 08:23 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Formulas (Post 3904395)
Rocky.. Your busted. Thats a SD. cam look at the dist gear teeth (smaller Dia.) regular cam the teeth are almost as big as the bearing journal..
Same lobes tho... just bustin your chops a bit :) Thanks for the pic.

You got me there!

Stuckinda60s 02-10-2010 03:28 PM

TRW made a cam which was supposed to be a version of the 744. There were some subtle differences but it ran quite well. It made a LOT of torque. I can't recollect the number, right now. If I do, I'll post it.

It might be worth researching. If memory serves, it had the long dwell.

KEN CROCIE 02-10-2010 06:56 PM

1 Attachment(s)
744 on left SPC-3 /e-909 on right

Kenth 02-10-2010 08:11 PM

Ken, did you check the Speed-Pro CS171R camshaft?

And what about the old H.O. Racing Specialities #744k 408/408 301/313 224/236 112/119?

Tom Vaught 02-10-2010 08:49 PM

Speed-Pro CS171R camshaft

That camshaft used to be supplied by CMC to them.

If Speed-Pro is still buying CMC 744 camshafts you should be able to get a "flat nose"
camshaft that way. Good Post Kenth.

Tom Vaught

2manyT/A'S 02-10-2010 09:10 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Cliff R (Post 3901133)
A little over a year ago, we attempted to get CMC to reproduce the WG-5059 camshafts for Pontiac engines. I was given a direct contact number to a representative from that company. After many left calls and attempts to get a live person on the phone, I gave up on the idea. They must be "fat, dumb and happy" at CMC, because they don't even have the intiative to try to drum up any new business. They had no idea if I wanted 10, or 10,000 of those cams produced? Not a single phone call was ever returned to us. That sort of attitude by an American Company doesn't surprise me at all. I run into it ALL THE TIME trying to get parts made. Some woln't even talk to you at all, and hang up on you unless you want at least 10,000 pieces a month.

Cripe, I can go offshore, the Chinese will make 100 of anything I want, at a tenth the price of any American Company!....FWIW......Cliff

GREAT THREAD! VERY informative.

Always wondered what CMC- CWC meant.

Fat,Dumb & Happy! (I'm going to use that one) :D

Is it just my imagination,or is there ALOT of that going around these days?

Has every successful/established business in the country assumed that attitude?


All times are GMT -4. The time now is 07:29 AM.